OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of the preoperative neoadjuvant chemotherapy for patients with cervical cancer. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted using the PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane databases. Studies comparing combined neoadjuvant chemotherapy treatment (NACT)/radical surgery treatment (RST) with RST alone in patients with cervical cancer were eligible for inclusion. RESULTS: Eight studies were finally included in this meta analysis, involving a total of 1302 patients. Meta analysis shows that NACT might have lower lymph node metastasis than RST [OR=0.57, 95% CI (0.41, 0.79), P=0.0008]. However, there are no differentiation between two groups in operation time [SMD=0.16, 95% CI (-0.08, 0.48), P=0.19], intraoperative estimated blood loss [SMD=0.20, 95% CI (-0.19, 0.58), P=0.48], intraoperative and postoperative complication rates [OR=1.33, 95% CI (0.45, 3.92), P=0.60], overall survival rate [OR=1.07, 95% CI (0.48, 2.41), P=0.86] and recurrence rate [OR=1.06, 95% CI (0.56, 2.03), P=0.85]. CONCLUSIONS: The safety and efficacy of two treatments are similarly. However, NACT can reduce the rate of lymph node metastasis, which is an independent risk factor for cervical cancer prognosis and may improve the prognosis of cervical cancer.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of the preoperative neoadjuvant chemotherapy for patients with cervical cancer. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted using the PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane databases. Studies comparing combined neoadjuvant chemotherapy treatment (NACT)/radical surgery treatment (RST) with RST alone in patients with cervical cancer were eligible for inclusion. RESULTS: Eight studies were finally included in this meta analysis, involving a total of 1302 patients. Meta analysis shows that NACT might have lower lymph node metastasis than RST [OR=0.57, 95% CI (0.41, 0.79), P=0.0008]. However, there are no differentiation between two groups in operation time [SMD=0.16, 95% CI (-0.08, 0.48), P=0.19], intraoperative estimated blood loss [SMD=0.20, 95% CI (-0.19, 0.58), P=0.48], intraoperative and postoperative complication rates [OR=1.33, 95% CI (0.45, 3.92), P=0.60], overall survival rate [OR=1.07, 95% CI (0.48, 2.41), P=0.86] and recurrence rate [OR=1.06, 95% CI (0.56, 2.03), P=0.85]. CONCLUSIONS: The safety and efficacy of two treatments are similarly. However, NACT can reduce the rate of lymph node metastasis, which is an independent risk factor for cervical cancer prognosis and may improve the prognosis of cervical cancer.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cervical cancer; NACT; RST; meta analysis; preoperative neoadjuvant chemotherapy; radical surgery treatment
Authors: J E Sardi; A Giaroli; C Sananes; M Ferreira; A Soderini; A Bermudez; L Snaidas; S Vighi; N Gomez Rueda; G di Paola Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 1997-10 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: M A Rettenmaier; D M Casanova; J P Micha; M F Moran; N S Ramsanghani; N A Syed; A Puthawala; P J DiSaia Journal: Cancer Date: 1989-06-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: H C Chang; C H Lai; P C Chou; C J Tseng; T C Chang; S Hsueh; Y S Ho; Y K Soong Journal: Cancer Chemother Pharmacol Date: 1992 Impact factor: 3.333